lito, Bishop of Sardis, being desired by Onesimus to give him a perfect catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, took a journey on purpose to examine this matter near its source, and having (as he says) made an exact inquiry, he sent him the names of them precisely agreeing with our canon; which, Eusebius says, he has preserved, because it contained all the books which the Church owned.

Origen gives the same catalogue; Athanasius reckons 22 books in the same manner, and says expressly, that "he delivers them, as they had received them by tradition, and as they were acknowledged by the whole Church of Christ." Cyril and Hilary give precisely the same catalogue, according (as they add) to the tradition of the ancients. Gregory Nazianzen reckons 22 books, and says none other are genuine. Lastly, the council of Laodicea by an express canon, delivers the catalogue of the canonical books as we do, decreeing that these only should be read in the Church.

a Hist. 1. 4. c. 26.

с

Now the

b Orig. in Ps. 1. Athan. in Synop. and in Eppasch. Cyril. Catech. 4.

c Can. 95 and 60.

d The council of Laodicea was held in the year 364, and its canons received hy the council of Chalcedon in 451, and further confirmed as the law of the Universal Church by the Emperor Justinian in 541. In opposition to this council, Roman Catholics

canons of this council were afterwards received into the code of the Universal Church.

On this subject, therefore, we have the concurring sense of the whole Church of God. It is true, the book of Revelation not being reckoned in it, this may be urged to detract from its authority; but this omission is accounted for by the design of the council, which was to declare the books that were to be read in the Churches, and the apocalypse, not being used on account of its obscurity, was therefore omitted. Independent of this, however, we have already seen, that it was received much earlier into the canon of the Scriptures.

Thus, we have four centuries clear for our canon in exclusion of all additional testimony.

:

allege the authority of the council of Carthage, on which we may observe 1. Its acts were never received publicly into the Church, having been confirmed only in the synod of Trullo, which is not acknowledged as authoritative. 2. Even if the latter were acknowledged, the council of Laodicea is approved in the same synod. 3. It cannot be decided what council of Carthage this was, some place it 397. (Bellar.de ver. Dei. 1. 1. c. 10.) and others in 419, (Binius in notis ad 47 can. ejusd Conc.) and 4. The synod of Trullo does not mention any particular council, but only speaks of canons agreed on in New Carthage. See Canus 1. 2. c. 9. Cosin's Hist. of the Canon, sec. 82. Field of the Church, B. 4. p. 382. The reader will observe, that here is an example of a direct contradiction between two acknowledged councils of the infallible Church. For the canon of Scripture received at Laodicea, and afterwards confirmed as the law of the Universal Church, is not the canon authorized in the council of Trent.

At first, indeed, many writings were read in the Churches, from the excellence of their contents, such as Clemens' Epistle, &c. Among these the apocryphal books came likewise to be read, as containing some valuable instruction and several fragments of Jewish history. Hence, they were reckoned among canonical Scriptures, (in the sense in which that word was used, signifying no more than genuine, in opposition to spurious;) for this is the reason assigned in the third council of Carthage, for calling them canonical, because they had received them from their fathers as books that were to be read in churches.

It remains only to observe, the diversity between the Articles now established and those set forth by King Edward. In the latter, there was no catalogue given of the books of Scripture, nor any distinction stated between those called canonical and apocryphal. There was also a paragraph added after the words proved thereby," although sometimes it may be ad"mitted by God's faithful people, as conducing to 'good order and decency." These words are now omitted, as the authority of the Church is treated of in the 35th article.

66

a See August. de Civit. Dei. 1. 18. c. 36.
b See Codex. Can. Eccl. Afric. Can. 24.

G

ARTICLE VII.

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

THE OLD TESTAMENT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE NEW ; FOR BOTH IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT EVERLASTING LIFE IS OFFERED TO MANKIND BY CHRIST, WHO IS THE ONLY MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MAN, BEING BOTH GOD AND MAN. WHEREFORE THEY ARE NOT TO BE HEARD WHICH FEIGN THAT THE OLD FATHERS DID LOOK ONLY FOR TRANSITORY

PROMISES.

ALTHOUGH THE LAW GIVEN FROM GOD BY MOSES, AS TOUCHING CEREMONIES AND RITES, DO NOT BIND CHRISTIAN MEN, NOR THE CIVIL PRECEPTS THEREOF OUGHT OF NECESSITY TO BE RECEIVED IN ANY COMMONWEALTH; YET, NOTWITSTANDING NO CHRISTIAN MAN WHATSOEVER IS FREE FROM THE OBEDIENCE OF THE COMMANDMENTS WHICH ARE CALLED MORAL.

THIS Article is composed of the sixth and nineteenth Articles as they were arranged in King Edward's reign, except that the latter had the following words after moral: "Wherefore

66

they are not to be heard, which teach that the "Holy Scriptures were given to none but to the "weak, and brag continually of the spirit, by "which they do pretend that all whatsoever

66

they preach is suggested to them; though

"manifestly contrary to the Holy Scriptures." These words were added in opposition to the extravagance of some enthusiasts at that time, but were removed in Queen Elizabeth's reign, when the sect fell into disrepute. As it now stands, the Article is directed against the Antinomians, who, from misunderstanding the doc-. trine of justification by Christ, without the works of the law, were led to fancy that a Christian was tied by no law as a rule; that by his renovation he became a law to himself, but that he obeyed not any written commandment. These errors and the licentiousness that flowed from them, arose from their not understanding the import of the word law in the New Testament, in which it stands most commonly for the complex of the whole Jewish religion in opposition to the Christian; as sometimes when it is put for a book, it means merely the Pentateuch of Moses. Hence, they supposed that the Old Testament having brought the world to the knowledge of the Messias, was no longer of any

a The enthusiasts here alluded to, are probably the Anabaptists. Among other opinions, they held that the Old Testament was abrogated by the coming of our Saviour. See Bullinger, Adv. Anab.

p. 75.

This sect was founded by John Agricola, a Saxon divine and native of Islebe, whence they were called Islebians. See Mosheim's Hist. v. 3. cent. 16. sec. 3. Part, 2. c. 1.